Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giwargis Warda

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Giwargis Warda

The result was keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Pyrusca (talk) 13:24, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

How notable is this person? Not so much Pyrusca (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A quick look at the results of the Google Books and Scholar searches linked above shows that the answer to the question posed by the nominator is "pretty damn notable". 86.17.222.157 (talk) 15:42, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no indication of notability. --Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is the fact that a 13th-century poet is still being discussed in 21st-century reliable sources not an indication of notability? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:57, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it certainly is.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 09:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 09:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 09:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep - There looks to be plenty of contemporary interest to me. Smmurphy^(Talk) 14:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Significant Syriac liturgical poet of the 13 century per sources at article, some of which were added after this was originally nominated. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 17:56, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep sources suffice to establish that this was a notable medieval poet.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:10, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.